Everyone is rushing past the word "Burisma". We have not heard a clear explanation. Maybe, if one of them could slow down and simply explain things. We really have no idea what the Kid was up to in Ukraine.
Was it a no-show job or not? It is a simple question. Because any 12 year old autistic kid is just as qualified to do nothing for Burisma as Joe's kid is.
This is not about emails or hard drives. It's simple, was the kid paid for no work?
Was it a no-show job or not? It is a simple question. Because any 12 year old autistic kid is just as qualified to do nothing for Burisma as Joe's kid is.
This is not about emails or hard drives. It's simple, was the kid paid for no work?
Don't we need to know this stuff before an election? So we don't let more criminals into the white house? Most of this stuff, historically, doesn't it seem more like "perks" of their job? So big deal who cares? Why are they all rushing?
1) It's reported, Hunter does not get into Delaware Law School but does G'Town and Yale? Ok, just explain. Could be lots of reasons. But it could be Felicity Huffman and Lori Laughlin, felonious type stuff. Explain it. Simple question. We deserve to know if they stole some other kids education or not, why is this still unanswered? What happened to the kids grades and lsat scores? Is the report fake? We don't know.
2) There is a report Biden's kid had a coke bust and Biden had it swept under the rug. True false explain, with sentences. That's felonious. See, simple question.
3) The tough question! Joe needs to explain this: "I never spoke with hunter about what he was doing on the Board of Burisma", that sentence is a huge huge huge math problem for Joe. I know how to read and count. Why do they ALWAYS rush past this part?
2) There is a report Biden's kid had a coke bust and Biden had it swept under the rug. True false explain, with sentences. That's felonious. See, simple question.
3) The tough question! Joe needs to explain this: "I never spoke with hunter about what he was doing on the Board of Burisma", that sentence is a huge huge huge math problem for Joe. I know how to read and count. Why do they ALWAYS rush past this part?
Facts seem to be, Hunter did consult at Burisma, which stunk see link below. That was over by the time he was on the board. Hunter told a reporter, while on the board he offered no work product, gave no advice. He was simply collecting big checks, for being Biden. In a country his dad, the Vice President of The United States, was in charge of our Ukraine policies in.
If this is corruption, this is supposed to make you angry. Very angry. Your 12 year old autistic kid is just as qualified to do nothing for Burisma as Joe's kid. How is this no-show job not corruption? That is a fair and very very unanswered question. Can we please stop rushing past it?
If this is corruption, this is supposed to make you angry. Very angry. Your 12 year old autistic kid is just as qualified to do nothing for Burisma as Joe's kid. How is this no-show job not corruption? That is a fair and very very unanswered question. Can we please stop rushing past it?
Here is the math of the problem: "I never spoke with hunter about what he was doing on the Board of Burisma" If it was a no-show job then:
A) If this is true, one way would be if Hunter did not know he was on the board of Burisma. Then why would they speak? They wouldn't. If this is the case, Joe took the money himself.
B) If this is True and Hunter and did know he was on the board, then why the hell not? They "promise" us their stupid honor system, with their honor? To do what? "Avoid the appearance of impropriety", welp this is how Joe does it, he on purpose looks the other way? That's conspiracy or accessorizing after the fact in the corruption or something. If it's corrupt.
C) Or he lied. If so, they did discuss what he was doing. That's conspiracy right? Also, he wasn't "doing" anything, that word is problematic, I dont like getting lied to.
A) If this is true, one way would be if Hunter did not know he was on the board of Burisma. Then why would they speak? They wouldn't. If this is the case, Joe took the money himself.
B) If this is True and Hunter and did know he was on the board, then why the hell not? They "promise" us their stupid honor system, with their honor? To do what? "Avoid the appearance of impropriety", welp this is how Joe does it, he on purpose looks the other way? That's conspiracy or accessorizing after the fact in the corruption or something. If it's corrupt.
C) Or he lied. If so, they did discuss what he was doing. That's conspiracy right? Also, he wasn't "doing" anything, that word is problematic, I dont like getting lied to.
See the problem, if Hunter did corruption, Joe did too. Feloniously. Why are we rushing past this?
It kind of seems like, two elections in a row with one indictable felon vs another indictable felon, (and we can't figure out we are getting robbed!). This government sucks. Subtract all the good we should be doing and the fuck whole we actually are, we have one awful government.
https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Ukraine%20Report_FINAL.pdf <---that is a .gov site, safe.
No comments:
Post a Comment